a.

Video Case Studies Project

b. Video Case Study #158 (Part 4 of 8) Engaging Critical Thinking through a
c.
d.
e.
f.

Nuclear War Scenario

Ryan Thompson
EDCI 5260 Fall 2015
No paid teaching, co-teaching or paraprofessional experience.
Domain One Planning and Preparation
i. Domain Rating
a.) Effective: Emerging
ii. Evidence of Rating
1. The instructional outcomes foster intercultural dialogue and thus
are suitable for most in the class. For example, at 6:05 one of the
Caucasian students in one of the groups makes the comment, plus
shes Japanese as his explanation for why the Japanese nurse
should not be included in their groups new post-nuclear society.
After this comment is made, the surprised Asian student sitting
right next to him says, Excuse me? Once the Caucasian student
realizes not everyone in his group may interpret his comment
similarly, he says No offense, and then proceeds to rationalize
his decision to exclude the Japanese nurse based on the fact that it
was the Japanese who bombed Pearl Harbor.
2. The outcomes are not as balanced as they could be. The chief
learning outcomestarting a new productive society in a nuclear
war scenarioseems like more of an activity, and emphasizes
communication and collaboration strategies; possibly to the
detriment of other domains; such as factual and procedural
knowledge; and conceptual understanding. At 6:15, one of the
students in the group referenced above mentions that the Japanese

bombed us, to which another student responds After we went to a

World War with them you doofus! Actually, the bombing occurred
before, not after. Correct factual and procedural knowledge would
seemingly be a prerequisite for a successful group activity, and this
students error reflects an imbalance in instructional outcomes,
whether intended or not.
g. Domain Two The Classroom Environment
i. Domain Rating
1. Effective: Emerging
ii. Evidence of Rating
1. There is little or no loss of instructional time. All planned activities
are purely topical, as attested by the students discussing the subject
matter they are tasked with. The exception to this occurs between
2:43 and 3:03, when the administrative office interrupts the
classroom via the public address system to inquire about the
whereabouts of a student. During this interruption, the students are
respectfully quiet until the teacher concludes the brief conversation
with administration. At its conclusion, the teacher simply says
Okay; you can resume, and the students continue with what they
were doing; and the teacher continues assisting the groups.
2. This class does not give off the vibe that it runs itself. Instead,
the teacher appears heavily involved in the management of
classroom transitions. These transitions are rough, although they
are accomplished. At 6:21, the teacher screams Hey! out of the
blue, and begins talking. The students dont quiet down until at
6:35; at which point the teacher can finally make his points so that

most of the class can hear him. However, even during this time,
there are still some students talking and murmuring; as evidenced
by the audible noise throughout as well as at 6:48 when he calls
out one student (Edna) by name and implores her to listen to his
instructions.
h. Domain Three Instruction
i. Domain Rating
1. Effective: Proficient
ii. Evidence of Rating
1. The teacher engages in Station Teaching for each group, although
he is the only teacher present in this large classroom. During his
teaching, he encourages participation from all students, even those
who are shy and hardly ever volunteer. One of these students is
Irene. In his Commentary which accompanies this video, the
teacher noted, One student, Irene, has cerebral palsy which
requires her to be in a wheelchair. She is a shy, happy child that is
well respected by her peers (NBPTS 2015). At 1:24 the teacher
asks Irene who she thinks is the most important person for the
group to bring along with them in their new post-nuclear society.
Irene said that she wanted to bring the policeman along because he
could readily respond to medical crises. The teacher then confirms
her inventive response with the fact that officers are trained as first
responders.
2. The questions the teacher poses to the groups are generally of high
quality and are open ended enough so that genuine discussion can
spring from these questions and disagreements among students can

form. An example of this occurs at 0:13, when the teacher asks one
of the students in one of the groups why he thinks its a good thing
that the police officer the students intend to incorporate in their
new post-nuclear society carries a gun. The student responds to the
teachers question by stating that the officer can use the gun to
hunt for food. However, another student in the groupa female
counters that the gun can also be used for nefarious purposes, like
killing some of the other group members. This proves that such
questions of Why? can elicit many different types of responses
on part of students and foster meaningful dialogue.